On 2013-02-22 10:57, Vitaly Chipounov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 21.02.2013 15:33, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2013-02-15 12:00, Vitaly Chipounov wrote:
>>> A socket may still have references to it in various queues
>>> at the time it is freed, causing memory corruptions.
>> Did you see it in practice? Or is
Hi,
On 21.02.2013 15:33, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-02-15 12:00, Vitaly Chipounov wrote:
>> A socket may still have references to it in various queues
>> at the time it is freed, causing memory corruptions.
> Did you see it in practice? Or is this patch based on code review? What
> will happen if
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 03:47:25PM -0600, mdroth wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:00:13PM +0100, Vitaly Chipounov wrote:
> > A socket may still have references to it in various queues
> > at the time it is freed, causing memory corruptions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vitaly Chipounov
Meant to cc
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:00:13PM +0100, Vitaly Chipounov wrote:
> A socket may still have references to it in various queues
> at the time it is freed, causing memory corruptions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Chipounov
> ---
> slirp/socket.c | 29 +
> 1 file changed,
On 2013-02-15 12:00, Vitaly Chipounov wrote:
> A socket may still have references to it in various queues
> at the time it is freed, causing memory corruptions.
Did you see it in practice? Or is this patch based on code review? What
will happen if those queued mbufs find their ifq_so NULL?
>
> S
A socket may still have references to it in various queues
at the time it is freed, causing memory corruptions.
Signed-off-by: Vitaly Chipounov
---
slirp/socket.c | 29 +
1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
diff --git a/slirp/socket.c b/slirp/socket.c
index 77b0c98..8
